A popular and cheap way for many UB students to get to and from home is in jeopardy as the ramifications of President Bush's 2006 budget become clear. Amtrak passenger rail service will receive no federal subsidies under Bush's proposal, a plan that could completely wipe out the national train service. With increasing fuel costs and rising airline prices, completely wiping out the only other mass transit system in the United States would leave the U.S. infrastructure - and many potential passengers - without an affordable alternative to airlines and driving.
The Bush administration says that it should kill Amtrak because it's losing money, partly due to the growing low-cost airlines. Amtrak lost $35 million in New York alone last year, according to a recent AP report. President Bush prefers that rail service be managed by the private sector. But that approach would let passenger rail wither and die in many places where it is needed.
Passenger rail service provides relatively fast, convenient, and most importantly, affordable transportation services. At medium distances, such as that between Buffalo and Albany or New York and Albany, the railway is a significantly better deal for most travelers. UB students regularly take advantage of this service as a cheap alternative when going home for the holidays.
According to U.S. Airways and Continental Airlines, a round trip flight from Buffalo to Albany ranges from $142 to $272, depending on the date and time of travel. That cost does not include other fees associated with air travel that raise the cost by as much as $70. Amtrak fares are $50 each way and are subject only to sales tax, making train travel significantly cheaper.
Amtrak also allows for significantly more luggage than airlines do at no additional charge. The cost and luggage allowance makes train travel ideal for college students coming from locations along the Thruway corridor, the Hudson Valley, and New York City.
It has long been known that Amtrak has not been turning a profit, but that never should have been the point of a subsidized rail service. Every major mass transit system in the United States fails to turn a profit without lots of help from the federal government. Public highway systems never turn a profit from toll collection, and struggling airlines would be completely gone without the huge bailouts and funding the federal government gives for air traffic control and the airlines themselves. Subsidies are provided for these endeavors for a very specific reason: they maintain the infrastructure. Private companies such as Greyhound or US Airways succeed because the federal government pays for the infrastructure they use: roads, terminals, and even a certain portion of fuel costs. That is what a majority of the budget for Amtrak goes to pay for - the infrastructure of the rail system.
According to Amtrak, the 2005 operating budget for the railway was $1.4 billion, with $1.2 billion of that coming from the federal government. While it could be reasonable to cut the budget in the hopes of establishing a transition to a private railway company, completely cutting the Amtrak budget would make it impossible for any company to take on the costs of maintaining the passenger rail infrastructure.
In order to maintain service and its very existence, Amtrak needs to make cuts somewhere. But the idea that fixing the problems of the service by taking away all support will not only take away a viable transit option for UB students - it will completely destroy a valuable part of the U.S. transit infrastructure.
